Written by Don Byrd
As I posted last week, a federal judge in Virginia is urging parties in a Ten Commandments dispute to think outside the box to arrive at a solution. One of his suggestions was the possibility of removing from public school displays the commandments that are explicitly religious in character, leaving a display of only six commandments, (which brings to mind a scene from Mel Brooks’ History of the World: Part I).
Church-state experts weighing in don’t sound optimistic that this would be a practical or acceptable answer to the problem. The Roanoke Times reports:
Charles Haynes, a senior scholar with the First Amendment Center, said the compromise is unlikely to appeal to either side.
“I don’t think it cures the problem,” Haynes said. “In fact, it may make it worse, because for many Christians, to somehow edit the commandments would be an offense to their faith.”
At the same time, he said, those who believe strongly in the separation of church and state would be equally troubled.
“It’s the worst of both worlds,” Haynes said. “It keeps the scriptures on the walls as a government-sanctioned message, but it truncates the scriptures and distorts their message.”
Meanwhile, columnist Ted Biondo suggests the plaintiffs challenging the display are responsible for cutting the religion out of the Ten Commandments. But, it’s the display’s defenders that argue the Ten Commandments’ historical, legal significance (not its religious significance) justifies the posting. So which side is secularizing this sacred text?
